Welcome to the best KC Chiefs site on the internet. You can view any post as a visitor, but you are required to register before you can post. Click the register link above, it only takes 30 seconds to start chatting with Chiefs fans from all over the world! Enjoy your stay!

The record contract the Colts handed defensive end Dwight Freeney late last week is yet another new wrinkle in the Larry Johnson-Chiefs contract saga.
Freeney’s $72 million deal, which includes $30 million in bonuses and $37.5 million over the first three years, raised the roof on all future contract demands across the league.
The Colts treated Freeney, the game’s second-best defensive end after Julius Peppers, like a quarterback. And by doing so, the Colts hammered the point that you can’t compare 2007 contracts by the standards established under the old collective-bargaining agreement.
The franchise-tag value for defensive ends had been around $8.6 million. Once Peppers inks a new deal, an agreement that should surpass Freeney’s, the franchise number for pass rushers will begin to approach $10 million.
My point in bringing this up is it is being made abundantly clear that the deal that LaDainian Tomlinson, the league’s best running back, signed in 2004 is obsolete when talking about Larry Johnson’s value in today’s market.
If the Chargers signed LT today, he would garner a $30 million signing bonus and $36 million over the first three years of the contract.
Under that scenario, what does the game’s second-best running back deserve? Larry and his agent have virtually no choice but to demand $25 million in guarantees.
I still see a trade as a legitimate possibility. The Hunt family has never shown the stomach for reaching into their piggy bank and handing out huge signing bonuses.
The Chiefs still operate like a $10 million bonus is a big deal. Yes, Tony Gonzalez got $18 million in guaranteed money, but only $10 million was in signing bonus. The rest was in guaranteed salary over the first four years of his new deal.
But look at the cash Colts owner Jim Irsay has been tossing around: Peyton Manning received $35 million in guarantees, Marvin Harrison got $23 million, Reggie Wayne took home $13.5 million and now Freeney just cracked $30 million.
There’s a huge difference between paying a guy in salary and paying a guy in guaranteed bonuses. The latter is far more risky and causes an owner to initially dip into his own finances to do it. It’s the difference between cash dollars and salary-cap dollars.
The Hunts will spend their salary-cap dollars, but they’ve been reluctant to stretch the cap by spending large sums of cash in bonuses.
I’m not going to beat up the Hunts or team president/general manager WildCarl Peterson about their frugal spending habits. You could argue the Colts are in a unique situation; they have arguably the league’s best quarterback, pass rusher and wide receiver.
The Chiefs have arguably the league’s best tight end, and they paid him like it. In my opinion, the Chiefs have the league’s best offensive guard, Brian Waters, and WildCarl took complete advantage of Waters in 2006 contract negotiations.
Is it WildCarl’s fault that Waters chose to do his deal without the assistance of an agent? Waters is every bit as good as Minnesota’s Steve Hutchinson, who inked a $49 million deal that included $16 million in bonuses.
Waters received a $4 million roster bonus, relatively modest salaries over the first three years ($585,000, $720,000 and $2.08 million), and roster bonuses in 2007 and 2008 of $3 million and $2.5 million. When you toss in workout bonuses and per-game roster bonuses, Waters received $14.6 million over three years. Hutchinson got $23 million.
Waters signed an extremely Chiefs-friendly agreement. It’s simply not the kind of reward teams generally give proven performers and rock-solid citizens such as Waters — at least not when they retain proper representation.
Again, I’m not trying to beat up Peterson or the Hunts. The Patriots and the Eagles, to name two franchises, have experienced success while gaining a reputation as cheap.
And does declining to give Johnson $20 million-plus in guarantees mean the Chiefs are cheap or does it signify that the organization believes Johnson isn’t worth it? According to my sources, so far, the Chiefs have offered Johnson less guaranteed money than Gonzalez. The Chiefs are allegedly in the $14 million to $15 million range, or about half of what LT would get today.
Is Johnson only half the running back that Tomlinson is? No one would argue that. A trade just might make sense for all parties. Brett Favre would love to have Larry Johnson, and the Packers would properly pay Johnson. The Chiefs could pick up a few draft picks

I already said "good morning", in another forum...... I would rather be 4-12, in a rebuilding year, than 4-12 while thinking that we were supposed to contend.

Right now, with L.J., I see alot of similarities, between the Chiefs and the Raiders. How can you not see it? Good runningback,( Though I don't see, in L.J., what you do.) Basically, a rookie quarterback, good defense, (Giving the Raiders the edge, there.) and our offensive line has dropped, in ability,massively, these past two offseasons, where the Raiders, already have a bad O-line.

If you look closely, who else, in our division, do we compare to?

If you will remember, I'm the one saying we will be fighting it out with the Raiders for 3rd place!

Someone to catch the ball down field would help. Sureing up our O line would help.

We've been throwing 10 yd posts for 3 years now with the occasional screen to the RB. Tony goes for an occasional 15 yd pass with all of the yardage coming after the catch.

I think the Chiefs are fairly close to having all the pieces but there is a fine line there between close and not even close! We have a bunch of young guys and it's not necassarily rebuilding just because you have young guys. You can expect quite a few mistakes i would assume but to trade the backbone of your offense for a few draft picks seems a bit aggressive to me.

Someone to catch the ball down field would help. Sureing up our O line would help.

We've been throwing 10 yd posts for 3 years now with the occasional screen to the RB. Tony goes for an occasional 15 yd pass with all of the yardage coming after the catch.

I think the Chiefs are fairly close to having all the pieces but there is a fine line there between close and not even close! We have a bunch of young guys and it's not necassarily rebuilding just because you have young guys. You can expect quite a few mistakes i would assume but to trade the backbone of your offense for a few draft picks seems a bit aggressive to me.

The two factors that most convince me that we should seek a trade, for L.J. are these.

1) Larrys value is peaked. He has been looking good, behind a strong O-line, and , previously, a great all-around offense. With all of that gone, now, this year would show another decrease in productivity. His value has been "balooned" by productivity in an offense that we no longer have.

2) Many Chiefs fans refuse to see Larry failure to put fourth effort, at times. But repetition of the games, with an open mind, to the possibility, reveals alot. Find the plays, where Larry is being asked to throw a block, or run, outide. It's not that he isn't good at it, more that he doesn't want to do it. And will put forth, a "Dieon Sanders, tackling" effort.

Tell me the last time a top 2 or 3 running back was traded.

Then tell me what they got for him.

Ricky Williams to Miami, for two first round picks. That's the most recent time, that I know of.

The two factors that most convince me that we should seek a trade, for L.J. are these.

1) Larrys value is peaked. He has been looking good, behind a strong O-line, and , previously, a great all-around offense. With all of that gone, now, this year would show another decrease in productivity. His value has been "balooned" by productivity in an offense that we no longer have.

2) Many Chiefs fans refuse to see Larry failure to put fourth effort, at times. But repetition of the games, with an open mind, to the possibility, reveals alot. Find the plays, where Larry is being asked to throw a block, or run, outide. It's not that he isn't good at it, more that he doesn't want to do it. And will put forth, a "Dieon Sanders, tackling" effort.

Ricky Williams to Miami, for two first round picks. That's the most recent time, that I know of.

1) So, you optimist of all optimists, is ready to throw in the towel on our offense huh?

2)How do you know he is not trying and may just not be a great blocking back? There are far far more backs in the game that can not block than there are that can! Or are good at it anyway!

3)Running outside comes down to play calling and style. And....your offensive line has A LOT to do with that as well. He is the type of back that waits for his block and if it's not there, well he's f*ed! He is a power back not a speed back.

Another prime example of the same type of back is the all time leading rusher in the NFL. Terrible to the outside!!! North and South style runner.

1) So, you optimist of all optimists, is ready to throw in the towel on our offense huh?

2)How do you know he is not trying and may just not be a great blocking back? There are far far more backs in the game that can not block than there are that can! Or are good at it anyway!

3)Running outside comes down to play calling and style. And....your offensive line has A LOT to do with that as well. He is the type of back that waits for his block and if it's not there, well he's f*ed! He is a power back not a speed back.

Another prime example of the same type of back is the all time leading rusher in the NFL. Terrible to the outside!!! North and South style runner.

Ricky Williams? Do I even need to respond to this?

That one is gonna be popular. (The optimist thing.)

2.) It is easy to tell, when someone isn't trying.

3.) Christian Okoye used to slam into defenders, when going outside. Jerome Bettis did it. Czonka, Earl Campbell, Riggins, Jim Brown! It's effort. If he is as one-dimensional as you say, then he is certainly, not worth the money. Versatility.

1) So, you optimist of all optimists, is ready to throw in the towel on our offense huh?

2)How do you know he is not trying and may just not be a great blocking back? There are far far more backs in the game that can not block than there are that can! Or are good at it anyway!

3)Running outside comes down to play calling and style. And....your offensive line has A LOT to do with that as well. He is the type of back that waits for his block and if it's not there, well he's f*ed! He is a power back not a speed back.

Another prime example of the same type of back is the all time leading rusher in the NFL. Terrible to the outside!!! North and South style runner.